Was there a gunshot from the grassy knoll?

A lot of people at the scene of the crime thought so. But don’t take my word for it.

In the latest installment of Len Osanic’s “50 Reasons for 50 Years” video series, JFK photo expert Robert Groden compiles photographic imagery from the first few minutes after the assassination of President Kennedy. View the pictures and decide for yourself.

You can find all the “50 Reasons for 50 Years” videos here, and you can subscribe too.

At History Matters, you can view what 216 witnesses to the assassination said about the origins of the gunshots.

 

80 comments

  1. Jonathan says:

    Warren critics need to re-think the language they use to describe 12/22/63 events. “Grassy knoll” is too easily pooh-poohed as conspiracy bunk. To say “witnesses raced up an incline toward a picket fence from which many said a shot or shots were fired” is harder to dismiss.

    • Dan says:

      The term “grassy knoll” was used on air by Walter Cronkite on CBS-TV within 30 minutes of the shooting to describe where suspicious activity was reported. Cronkite was reading from a wire service report that used the term “grassy knoll”, UPI I believe. The term has been turned into one of derision, but it originates with Walter Cronkite and UPI in the immediate reporting after the assassination.

      • Actually, Cronkite was reporting what Merriman Smith said to him via phone. Smith coined the term.

      • The grassy Knoll whoever termed that phrase is irrelevant. The relevancy is people rushing to the grassy knoll. People do not run to a place for no reason and the people laying on the ground in front of the knoll felt they were being shot at from behind. Those are facts the other facts are JFK wrote an had a law pass that was to end the Federal reserve system. Executive order 1110 was passed that was going to be the beginning to the end of the federal reserve system. Fact two JFK severed relationships with Cuba. When that took place the MAFIA lost millions of dollars. Those two facts were the ultimate reasons for JFK,s assassination. Also note when Jack Ruby was interviewed he had told the press Oswald did not even fire a shot. The Grassy knoll and other evidence is simply enough for the wealth to assassinate JFK. Little history note Napoleon along with Adolf Hitler both attempted to fight the controlling wealth of the world if those two men failed who was JFK to attempt to fight the worlds controlling wealth. Well quite obviously JFK was a nobody.

        • Paul says:

          Ruby could have been absolutely right about Oswald not firing a shot. The irony is that JD Tippitt may have been the one assigned to kill Oswald, for the same reason Ruby killed him(Oswald) two days later.

        • Ronnie Wayne says:

          The message sent by issuing $$$ from the treasury is important. It alerted wall street and the accompanying bankers to the need for action.

  2. LMB says:

    Seeing is believing. The Warren Commission cover up would have you believe they were running there for free lunch.

    • Paul says:

      The Warren Commission lawyers kept telling witnesses words to the effect “You must be mistaken, it couldn’t have happened that way”. This is one of the details of that tragic day that angers me the most, because the witnesses were there, whereas no one on the Warren Commisson was.

  3. John Kirsch says:

    I visited the Sixth Floor Museum a couple times when I lived in the Fort Worth area. On my first visit, I remember being surprised by how small the area was where the shooting (or shootings) took place. It doesn’t seem unreasonable to wonder whether the shots actually did come from the School Book Depository Building (I don’t believe that. I’m just making an argument.) and that the sounds of the gunshots could have echoed off various surfaces in the area in ways that led people to believe the shots came from the so-called grassy knoll area. But looking at the raw footage and seeing how all those people ran immediately to the grassy knoll and the rail yard makes it hard for me to believe that all those people cold have been wrong. After all,they were right there in Dealey Plaza when the shootings occurred. The footage of the lone police officer racing into the School Book Depository Building immediately after the shooting, while people just stand around in front of the building wondering what happened, is telling. If all or even some of the shots came from the building they were standing in front of, wouldn’t at least some of them have been trying to get inside the building to find out what had happened. like the other people who ran up to the grassy knoll area?

    • Dan says:

      There were trees between the sixth floor window and the limousine for much its of path on Elm Street, blocking any shot. This was a considerable problem for the Warren Commission as it limited the timing for any possible shots from that location.

      • Mike T says:

        The trees that are next to the SBD were a lot shorter than they are today. There was only one tree that partially blocked the view from the corner window after the first shot was fired. The second and third shots were fired as soon as the assassin had a clear shot at JFK’s limo. As John Kirsch stated in his post, the Dealey Plaza area is “small”, The fatal shot to JFK was only 88 yards for the corner window on the sixth floor. For an assassin using a rifle with a scope, that is not a difficult shot. The assassin left three spent shell casings on the floor by the window. Clint Hill, the Secret Service Agent that ran after the Limo and jumped on the rear of the car as the shots were being fired testified there were THREE SHOTS and they all came from the SBD. People that thought they heard shots coming from the Grassy Knoll were hearing echos of the rounds fired from the SBD. There numerous hard surfaces in Dealey Plaza for sound to bounce off.

        • Paul says:

          Mike T, you leave a lot of room for commentary here. I’ll begin with Clint Hill. He probably had the best view of the blood-spatter coming out of the BACK of JFK’s head. That had to result from a shot from somewhere other than the TSBD. You talk about the second and third shots-how about the first? There’s good proof that there were in fact TWO shell casings, not 3, meaning that just 2 shots were fired from the TSBD 6th floor.

          • Photon says:

            Then why does Clint Hill support the Warren conclusions? Do you know more about what he saw then he does?
            Where is your proof that there were only two shells found?

          • Sam Martin says:

            1. Three shell casings were found and photographed by the Dallas PD. Only 2 of them along with the unfired shell were sent to the FBI on 11/22/63. The third casing was kept by Capt. Fritz.
            2. Clint Hill in his testimony to the Warren Commission stated that the head shot came from the right, but as to whether it came from the rear he could not be sure.

      • Dr TCH says:

        Dan, the condition of the maple tree is controversial, but I think it reasonable to conclude that at least one of the shots–say the early +back shot–was impossible from the supposed TSBD location.

        What is more at issue is that the WR narrative is preposterous and that a much more valuable approach would be one which disregards WR dogma, examines the totality of the evidence, then attempts to arrive at some logical, meaningful conclusions and hypotheses.
        There is no particular reason to assume that any of the shooters were in that “sniper’s nest” location. In fact, this would be one of the worst locations for a professional sniper to execute his mission.

        1. Some tree obstruction.
        2. Vertical piping to the left of the window.
        3. Window open only about a third (and very low window-sill), rendering any shot difficult.
        4. Many cardboard boxes stacked close to the window, allowing little clearance for a sniper to operate.
        5. Some witness testimony supported the fact of two individuals at TSBD windows (neither dressed like Oswald).

        • Dr TCH says:

          6. Chief Curry, himself, later admitted that the Dallas police investigators were never able to “place” Oswald at that sixth floor window.

        • John says:

          You just hit the nail on the head, in particularly regarding the vertical piping. I noticed the same thing on my visits. That particular piping, depending on if you are a right or left handed shooter is a HUGE insurmoutable problem, because no two objects cannot occupy the same space at the same time – and that piping ain’t going no where. Was LHO Oswald a left or right hand shooter? I don’t know. You can’t trust the photographic records as negatives can either be accidentally or intentionally reversed. Some proof might come from Marine Corp pictures. My eyes are too bad now, but perhaps someone has the ability and means to see if the name labels if his uniform are correct or reversed in any photos that show him firing a rifle.

          For all the reasons you listed the TSBD is terrible field of fire for what allegedly happened on Elm Street.

          Best spots I saw were:

          1. Second to third story of the Dal-Tex building.

          2. The South West Overpass – problem is a North East bystander may be hit there.

          3. The best locale is the intersection of the North West end of the picket fence and the upper triple overpass. Perfect parapet. Z-312 seems to line up right there too. I’ve heard the sewer system empties out in a parking lot behind the overpass. Would love to see the 1963 city sewer maps and diagrams. Sounds like it could possibly have been a tunnel rat operation or just a simple ass off to a car trunk or shove the rifle in the sewer pipe out of sight and quickly have someone pull you up an out and reposition the grate. Damn few clear photos of that corner at the time time in question. Wonder if there are any gaps on the bottom of the pickets of the fence at that location?

          Personally I think someone popped off a few decoy firecrackers. Close to the actual positions. But far enough away to turn people’s heads at the right moment.
          A magicians trick.

          • Paul M says:

            John, I agree with your idea of diversionary sounds. My theory is shots fired with no intention of hitting JFK from the TSBD. This would account for the “wild miss”, and would distract witnesses from the actual killer. Note in Altgens photo all of the SS agents in the follow up car, including Hill, are looking back towards the depository.
            I also think that the witnesses reacting to an echo is ridiculous. The direct blast of a gun that is pointed within a few degrees of directly to your front would be obvious- you would feel the sound concussion. The sheer number of people running to the knoll seems to confirm this. The so-called “echo” response is almost as preposterous as the “jet effect” explanation for the head snap.

          • KenS says:

            North side knoll pyrotechnics to divert crowd attention, south side knoll sniper for frontal shots as described by Fiester.

          • John says:

            Paul,
            I concur with your idea regarding intentionally missed shots and with your echo analysis.

            Ken,
            I haven’t read Ms. Feister’s book, but have not dismissed it, the little bit of it I have picked up from it on this site is very impressive.

            My gut tells me that Mr. Morley’s lawsuit and this site are making all the right people pretty nervous about something. Gives me hope!

            I want to apologize to Mr. Morley for not donating to the cause as if yet. Like many others these are tight financial times, but as soon as my tax refund come from Uncle Sam I will do so. Thank you for fighting the good fight!!

  4. James Reed says:

    I have reviewed the film and calculate it took about 15 – 20 seconds before people reacted to the shots and ran to the Grassy Knoll. I have looked for anyone walking away from the area when everyone else is running to knoll.

    Look at the lady and policman on Bell film at the 59 second mark. Why is a policeman walking away when everyone else is running to the Grassy Knoll

    • H.A.H. says:

      The fact the “policeman” is walking is by itself disturbing. Being in uniform would normally require a certain responsiveness in this type of event. Walking away from gunfire indicates he was reasonably sure there would be no more. How did he know? If this were 2013 we could enhance his facial image and possibly his badge. I’d call him ‘a person of interest’

  5. JSA says:

    I think it should be obvious that Kennedy was shot from both the back and the front, as there was a bullet down into his back, shot from behind. Also the shot that hit Governor Connelly was I think coming from behind the car. Finally, from the back you have the missed shot that hit the curb where Mr. Tague was hit by a chip of concrete in the cheek. But JFK was hit twice (at least) in the front: in the throat, then into his right temple, the shot that killed him. Those shots I believe came from the front, shot from behind the wooden fence. There’s just no way all of the shots could have come from the front. The shots from behind could have come from a number of places, not just from the TSB. I’ve heard good argument that the Daltex building was a source of some of the shots from behind, in addition to the TSB.

    Forgive my ignorance of the details here, but could someone post a good source which tries to comprehensively show where each shot probably originated from, in sequential order? That would go a long way to clear some of the confusion people might have. Maybe Jim Marrs did do this?

    Even if there were echoes in that small arena of Dealey Plaza, there were so many people who saw the smoke around the fence, including motorcade participants Kenny O’Donnell and Dave Powers. I think it’s telling that so many people rushed up to that area. My only question would have been: weren’t any of them afraid that they might have been shot by rushing up so fast? I know I would have had some doubts if I were there about running immediately up to where I thought someone had been shooting. I would have worried about getting shot by a fleeing assassin.

    • Eric Hollingsworth says:

      If you do a web search on “david lifton three assassins” you’ll find some links to an analysis, published in “Ramparts” magazine, of where the shots might have originated.

      If you search for “don roberdeau dealy plaza map” you’ll find an excellent temporal and spatial analysis of the assassination.

      It’s been many years since I read Marrs, but I seem to recall that when I cross-checked his diagrams with other sources there were some discrepancies.

    • hans trayne says:

      JSA, search in YouTube for lblevins channel. he has a number of video presentations on the attack and presents visual analysis of what he thinks happened. In a nutshell, he believes JFK was sandwiched in between the two pergolas while being shot at from the upper floors of the Dal-Tex building from behind. He does not believe the SS guards shot behind or in front of JFK did any shooting (although some do.
      In addition, there are several visuals researchers that have posted enhancements & enlargements of the Nix film that indicate gunfire from the pergola shelter behind Zapruder & Sitzman.
      For those who believe the storm drains were the source of some of the shots there are also several videos posted on that subject too.
      You’ll notice in all the film re-enactments that have been done since 1964 the guards & their car are missing from the TSBD’s alleged sniper’s line of sight films & photos, making it impossible for the public to see if any or all the shots to JFK were blocked by his rear guards tailgating him during the actual attack. Even Oliver Stone left this crucial sniper’s line of sight to target view with the guards & their car accurately represented out of his JFK movie.
      Each time this is done a distortion of histor4y occurs. The guards & their follow-up car tailgating the JFK parade car were there and part of the history that occurred 22 Nov 1963.
      Check it out, you’ll find lots of food for thought in the video presentations.
      :)

    • mitchum22 says:

      Yo, JSA.

      IMHO, the best analysis we have is Pat Speer’s at his amazing website:

      http://www.patspeer.com/

      Specifically, the shot sequence:

      http://www.patspeer.com/chapter20%3Aconclusionsandconfusions%3A

      Speer’s eBook — running almost 1,000 pages if you print out each chapter — is one of the best (and least known) works on the case. Much better than almost all of what you’ll pay for at Amazon.

      • Bill Pierce says:

        Mitchem22: Read this if you haven’t already:
        http://www.history-matters.com/essays/frameup/EvenMoreMagical/EvenMoreMagical.htm

        FBI substituted magic bullet 399 for the pointed-nosed bullet that was actually found at Parkland. Except as an indictment of FBI’s single-minded crusade to blame Oswald, ignore it as evidence. And Kennedy had an entry wound in his throat . . . unless one believes that expert trauma room professionals were grossly incompetent. The 313 shot was not fired from the TSBD. It was a frangible bullet unlike those allegedly fired by Oswald. The bullet entered the front right of JFK’s head and blew out a large hole in the rear of the president’s head. See photo F8. Speer’s thesis isn’t remotely convincing.

      • Speer’s shot sequence is awful. “Shot #3. Approximate firing time: Zapruder frame 310-311.

        Hit Kennedy near the temple at frame 313. Bullet fragmented. One piece of its core seems to have continued on to chip the concrete near Tague around 319.”

        James Tague, alive today, would just laugh if you told him that. He says he heard an early “firecracker” shot, an early miss on JFK. He then says he was next almost hit by a separate shot.

        Almost nobody I know in JFK research believes JFK was shot from behind in the temple … and then with a fragment almost hitting Tague as far away from JFK as he was (50 yard? I have not measured it.)

        Tague was almost hit by a full bullet that chipped the curb in front of him, sending up concrete spray hard enough to wound his cheek.

        I vote for JFK’s head kill shot to have come from the Grassy Knoll… and not the south knoll either. Robert Groden certainly thinks so.

        • Pat Speer says:

          You’re wrong, Robert. Tague was not dismissive of my theory. As I recall he felt fairly sure the shot impacting near him was the second shot heard by others. That’s what I believe. When one studies the witness statements it becomes clear the second shot was the head shot.

        • Paul Turner says:

          James Tague, who has since passed away, believes there were 2 head shots that sounded like 1 because they were the ones that were 1.5 seconds apart. One hit JFK in the back of the head, the other in the right side-this being the fatal shot. Thus, I join you, Robert Morrow, in thinking he was killed by a shooter from the grassy knoll. Tague’s “LBJ And The Kennedy Killing”is a great read, by the way.

    • Paul says:

      JSA, I, too, am convinced at least one shot came from the Dal-Tex Bldg. I think it was either the shot that hit JFK in the back, or the one that hit him in the back of the head, right before the one from the front that killed him.

    • Paul says:

      JSA, you mention Powers and O’Donnell. They later told Tip O’Neill that they did indeed see the smoke by the fence, but they ended up reluctantly going with the dumb Warren Commission argument of “it couldn’t have happened that way”. I guess it wouldn’t have made much difference, but it’s a shame they decided to go against what they saw with their own eyes.

      • Bumber says:

        How can this be when all bullet fragments and the one intact bullet recovered from the Connally stretcher matched Oswald’s rifle to the exclusion of all other weapons on the planet. We do not have any bullets / fragments in existence today that were associated with the assassination of President Kennedy that do not match the Mannlicher-Carcano purchased, handled, owned, and fired by Lee Harvey Oswald. Unless the people you have shooting from other locations all missed everything which makes them all very poor expert marksmen.

      • Dr TCH says:

        This is correct, Paul. They DID admit this to Tip O’Neill, which was certainly a revelation. ; )

        Massive pressure was applied to shape the testimony to conformance with the “official narrative” of the “lone, crazed gunman.”

  6. Alan Dale says:

    [IMG]http://i1217.photobucket.com/albums/dd383/JamesJAngleton/Dealey3a.jpg[/IMG]

  7. Alan Dale says:

    ^ Okay. That didn’t work as well as I’d hoped.

    Lemme try this: I’m very hopeful that some among those of us who reject the mythology imposed by our government’s official telling of President Kennedy’s assassination will be open to reassessing what we think we know if given reason to do so.

    Contemporary forensic sciences have produced revelations in the emerging applications of new methods and new technologies employed in modern crime scene reconstruction and analysis.

    Until recently I have chosen to keep many of the forensic aspects of the case at arms length. I agree with earlier statements to the effect that when experts disagree, we are disadvantaged in terms of lacking essential training and education to know whom to support. Some of it may ultimately rely upon intuition or instinct.

    What I have recently come to consider is my own slow realization that many of the most current advancements in forensic research represent new facts which may seem counter-intuitive to those who have no training in the related fields of newly emerging technologies and disciplines. I see all of the various stages of our 50 year journey from Dallas to the present as necessary steps in the long slow story of our originally blind struggle to move from darkness to light. I bear no resentment or animosity towards those pioneers who simply did the best they could, based upon what was available at the time, to accurately assess and interpret “their” facts. No one can blame the researchers and critics of the past who genuinely sought to understand questions which truly could not, at the time, have been answered.

    We’re a long way from there now, and we are still moving forward. Research developments in the mechanics of head wound ballistics, utilization of unbelievably high-speed photography, radial and concentric fracture sequencing studies of human skulls, symmetrical and asymmetrical beveling in relation to projectile directionality, related subjects of distinguishing back spatter from forward spatter and, perhaps most extraordinary of all, the news that current forensic research indicates the forward movement of President Kennedy’s head (at Z-frame 313) followed by violent rearward movement is consistent with a single gunshot to the head from the front. Studies conducted by Karger (2008), Radford (2009), and Coupland (2011) prove initial transfer of energy causes the target to swell or move minutely into the force and against the line of fire.

    I once tried, I mean, I really tried to discuss some of this with a particularly stubborn person whose opinions of his own outdated, misinformed opinions rendered his cup to be too full to accommodate any new anything. He had everything he needed and was content to sit back and bask in the secure warmth that his certainty afforded him.

    I suspect that Progress is a train that does not wait for everybody, especially old fatheads, to climb on board before moving inexorably from the station.

    The book is Enemy of the Truth: Myths, Forensics, and the Kennedy Assassination by Sherry P. Fiester. Worthy of our attention and gratitude.

    • Jonathan says:

      The physics here: When the bullet strikes the head, Newton’s Third Law requires the head, for a fraction of time, to exert the same force against the bullet as the bullet exerts against the head.

      After that fraction of time, the bullet has passed into the soft interior of the skull. The head at that moment has momentum in opposite directions: From the initial strike, it has a momentum in the direction of the entering bullet. From the travel of the bullet within the skull, it has momentum in the direction and speed of the bullet.

      Momenta add along a time dimension.

      So, the head is struck; at that moment it does not move; in the next fraction of time it is propelled by momentum slightly in the direction of the entering bullet; and then it follows the path of the bullet.

      Credentials: B.S. in Electrical Engineering.

  8. Virtually all conspiracists envision the fatal head shot as coming from in front of the President. I agree, the shot did come from the front, but front is not the Grassy Knoll. Prior research indicates Kennedy’s head is turned approximately 26 degrees beyond profile to Zapruder in frame 312. That computation places the Grassy Knoll to the side, not the front of the President. As a result, conventional trajectory reconstruction techniques indicate the fatal headshot originated from a location other than the Grassy Knoll. A straight-line trajectory for the fatal headshot is not possible due to lack of evidence; however, a trajectory cone, which would encompass all possible trajectories, can be computed. Extending the trajectory cone against the line of fire, forward of the President, and into the Plaza identifies all possible shooter locations. That trajectory cone encompasses the south end of the triple overpass and a portion of the adjacent parking lot. However, it does not include the Grassy Knoll. I agree a shot was fired from the Grassy Knoll, but not the fata thel head shot. Contemporary forensic disciplines offer new insights into the assassination. By approaching the assassination as an unsolved major crime, information meeting the standard of evidence required to support a criminal conviction can be determined. Historical researchers concerned with the Kennedy assassination need to avail themselves of the latest forensic offerings to bring reliability to their conclusions.

    • mitchum22 says:

      Dr. Fiester,

      Your book, “Enemy of the Truth,” is one of the few masterpieces in the canon. Wonderful to see you here.

      m22

      • Thank you for the kind words. I am a retired Certified Senior Crime Scene Investigator and Police instructor with over 30 years of experience and a court certified expert in crime scene investigation, crime scene reconstruction, and bloodstain pattern analysis in Louisiana Federal Court and over 30 judicial districts in the states of Louisiana, Mississippi, and Florida. However, I do not hold a doctorate. I appreciate your comments and hope Enemy of the Truth was instrumental in your developing a better understanding of the assassination.

    • JSA says:

      “I agree a shot was fired from the Grassy Knoll, but not the fatal head shot.”

      Maybe the shot from the Grassy Knoll (behind the fence) was the shot that hit Kennedy’s throat?

      • Dr TCH says:

        Nope, JSA, the throat shot was much earlier and seems to have originated from atop the south underpass. The trajectory angle to the “knoll” would have been wrong. Incidentally, a key component of WR apologists and legitimate research attempted debunkers is to insist that the throat shot was from the rear, which is pure lunacy and propaganda. Then, they will yell, “Oh, OK, then where did the bullet go?” We have evidence that the hilum of the right lung was damaged, which seems to have been a result of that shot..so we DO happen to “know where it went,” though this is much less important than strong Parkland Hospital testimony to the nature of the front neck (throat) wound. And, incidentally, the nuts will also insist that the back wound was located at the rear neck, when it was definitely lower, around the level of T-3.

      • Paul says:

        the fatal head shot appeared to be coming from the side. To me, that would be from the grassy knoll, or from that storm drain that some conspiratorial theorists have discussed. I simply don’t see how it would come from the Texas School Book Depository.

    • Paul May says:

      Sherry, nice to see you again. My question: where did the missed shot from the grassy knoll go?

      • Paul, I don’t believe there is a forensically based answer to that question. However, witnesses’ statements and acoustical evidence do indicate what may be interpreted as a shot from that area. Some have suggested it may have been a firecracker, and some suggest it was a diversionary tactic, regardless of the source.
        Sherry

    • Mike Rago says:

      The crime scene photographs are quite clear that the President was struck by TWO separate shots to the head. One can see that when the Moorman photo is compared to frame 337 of the zapruder film.

      The Moorman photo was taken at about Zapruder frame 315. It shows the back of the head profile of the President is normal.

      Moorman photo showing back of head profile.
      http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-587WLV_5gFw/UchUK2ICRvI/AAAAAAAABmc/JmhPtQc3GRM/s1600/moormanfullheadcropnega.png

      However Zapruder frame 337 shows a severly deformed back of head profile.

      http://jfkassassination101.blogspot.com/2013/06/the-fifth-fragment.html

      By comparing the two photographs it is clear the President was struck by two bullets at two different times.

      The question is when did the second bullet strike the President in head?

      Once again, I believe the crime scene photographs tell us when that occurred. The second bullet struck the President at Zapruder frame 318.

      https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/ViucNI7tFp61nYiB44UpBMqF_CHPjZFGUnl9WUP_i5I=w720-h480-no

    • KenS says:

      A most compelling argument for a shot from the front. Yours is the first, IMHO, to offer an explanation that appears to make scientific sense of frames 312/313 of the Z film and what we see there. I have puzzled over this since I bought my first fuzzy 8mm bootleg Z film from PJ back in the mid-70s. Reading over some comments, sadly, I am not sure all have a full understanding and grasp the import of your argument.

  9. Alan Dale says:

    The diagram which I attempted to post may be found, and enlarged, on this page:

    http://enemyofthetruth.wordpress.com/2013/03/22/seeing-is-believing/

    Sometimes a picture is worth more than too many words.

  10. RLL says:

    Check out the 1970 spatial chart of the northern half of Dealey Plaza.

    http://www.ratical.org/ratville/JFK/DPschematic.html

  11. John Kirsch says:

    The foto with this post reminds me of the famous image of people scattering during a street demonstration in Petrograd during the Russian Revolution. There is that same sense of helplessness and confusion in the wake of official violence.

  12. common sense says:

    If you really want to see where the shots were thought to come from look at the first Altgens photo.It is a real-time picture taken just after the second shot.

  13. paul gorrell says:

    There’s a bullet hole on the left side of the windshield in the Algens 6 photo. It is significantly larger than the widely circulated crack in the limo windshield photo. From Kennedy’s throat wound through the hole line up directly with the South Knoll Overpass area.That in itself proves someone was firing from the left side of the car.

  14. Jonathan says:

    Was there a shot from the grassy knoll?

    Depends, IMO.

    Parkland and Bethesda docs saw a deficit in the rear of JFK’s skull. See Humes’s ARRB testimony and Ebersole’s HSCA testimony. The photo showing clipped hair and rear intact skull is false, a fabrication.

    Bobby Hargis was splattered so hard he thought he’d been hit. That’s a fact.

    The Harper fragment was identified by a Dallas pathologist as being from the occipital region.

    All of this adds up to a shot that exits JFK’s skull in the rear. Or a frangible bullet that explodes the rear of his skull. Given three-dimensional geometry, it’s hard for me to say a shot came from the grassy knoll. I’ll defer to witnesses who saw a skull impact above and slightly forward of the right ear. That matches with the photo showing the right temporal skull flap.

    If I were a forward shooter that day, I’d want a concealed spot from which to shoot; a clean line of fire; and a clear getaway.

    • Photon says:

      First off,nobody described a “deficit” in the rear of the skull. The anatomic term would be “defect”, which could be anything from an abrasion to an avulsion. But the autopsy report and every forensic pathologist that has examined the photos confirm that all shots that hit JFK came from behind. There is no way around that fact.There is no anatomic evidence whatsoever for any shot from the front.
      There was no bullet hole in the windshield.Why this continues to be posted is beyond me; let’s see a picture of this hole-not the crack that we have all seen.
      Who is the Dallas pathologist that identified the Harper fragment as occipital? How could he make that determination with a fragment taken out of anatomic context? With no knowledge of the nature of JFK’s wound? The simple answer is that he couldn’t. Wouldn’t the pathologists that actually examined the wound or examined photos of the wound be more reliable in establishing the source of the bone fragment? Has any other pathologist stated unconditionally that it was occipital? There is no evidence whatsoever of any occipital wound- no photographic evidence, no radiographic evidence, no plausible eyewitness evidence from Parkland. The only Physician at Parkland who even saw the occipital area was William Midgett, who helped remove JFK from the limo and placed him on the gurney in a supine position, with the head resting on the EOP making visual inspection of the occipital area physically impossible. JFK remained in this position until his body was placed in the casket. Midgett never saw an occipital wound and he was the last M.D. to see that area until the autopsy was started.
      Bobby Hargis has repeatedly stated that he rode “into” the splatter cloud; I have posted 3 quotes from him on this site confirming that.
      Again, if you ignore the autopsy results and the findings of real experts you are ignoring reality. Give us just one piece of forensic evidence, just one piece of firm anatomic evidence that proves a shot from the front hit JFK.

      • KenS says:

        Photon, forget for a moment the rear defect issue, it may not be necessary to justify a frontal shot. I would be interested in your opinion of Fiester’s blood spatter analysis from the Z film, or if you have already given it, where it might be found.

        • Paul says:

          That is one of the first things I thought of after reading Photon’s comment. That blood spatter came out of the back of JFK’s head. Couldn’t have come from a shot from the TSBD.

          • Photon says:

            Except it didn’t come out of the back of JFK’s head. The Zapruder film clearly shows ejecta traveling anterior and superior-entirely consistent with an exit wound exactly where the Zapruder film, the autopsy photos and the autopsy x-rays prove it to be.
            Sherry Fiester doesn’t know what she is talking about-even Cyril Wecht doesn’t buy her claims.
            Sherry Fiester claims to be an expert. a “Certified Senior Crime Scene Investigator”. well, certified by whom. Google the term “Certified Crime Scene Investigator”. Guess what-THERE AREN’T ANY ENTRIES. There is no such certification. The closest is the IAI Crime Scene analyst, Go to their website- nobody named Fiester or Gutierrez is listed as having been certified as a Senior Crime Scene Analyst. Nor is anybody with those names certified at the basic Crime Scene Analyst level.
            So what gives? Is this a re-run of the Primeau diploma mill certification without even that level of documentation?
            if she is such an expert, lets see some proof.

          • Jonathan says:

            Photon,

            You’re at it again. Let’s have your educational background. I posted mine in response to our simple request. And how about your real name as well.

            You insist on credentials for everyone else.

            It would be one thing if, as you say, you study of the JFK were just a hobby, just a diversion from the life and death issues you deal with daily. But you claim special knowledge and connections.

            You claim medical knowledge. You claim to know FBI and CIA agents. You claim, to work for a corporation that provides services to the U.S. government.

            C’mon, Photon. Tell all here who you are and about your special knowledge so that all here may have the opportunity to assess your competency to make comments the comments you do on the JFK case.

          • Photon says:

            I already have.

          • Jonathan says:

            Photon,

            No you haven’t. You haven’t told those here your name, your educational background, your areas of expertise and training, whether you are male or female.

            All anyone here knows about you for sure if that in the JFK case you abhor facts that conflict with your pre-conceived ideas and will do anything to try to diminish or obscure such facts. That trait is sterling for one involved in covert activities, where lies are routine. That trait does not serve anyone well on this site.

          • Dr TCH says:

            Paul…You are positively correct. The Z-film APPEARS to show spatter from the right-front, but we have known for about twenty years now that the Zapruder film (most all surviving film footage and still film exhibits, in fact) has been significantly altered. There was a large hole in the right-rear of JFK’s head (as testified to by all of the Parkland Hosp. medical personnel. Some of their testimony changed a bit, due to pressure upon them to conform to the official narrative, but the record shows that this, indeed, was the major (exit) wound in the President’s skull. And, yes, there is no way this wound, nor could have been caused from a shot from the TSBD. No way the throat wound could have come from there either. Yes, throat wound, not “rear neck wound,” of which there was none.

      • Jonathan says:

        JOHN EBERSOLE, MD Testifying to the HSCA:

        “Upon removing the body from the coffin, the anterior aspect, the only things noticeable were…and a neatly sutured transverse surgical wound across the low neck.”

        “The back of the head was missing….”

        “…about 12:30(a.m.) a large fragment of the occipital bone was received from Dallas and at Dr. Finck’s request I X-rayed [it]….”

        JAMES HUMES, MD Testifying to the ARRB:

        ” When they got finished embalming, we had to put–we didn’t have to, but we helped them put the scalp back together and the skull. And the defect that remained in the skull–I can’t now measure it specifically–was three or four or five centimeters, something like that. And we used a rubber dam to cover that part of the skull defect.”

        COMMENTS:

        1) Note Ebersole’s testimony about a neatly sutured transverse surgical wound in the low neck. THAT’S NOT A GASH.

        2) Ebersole: Back of head missing.

        3) Humes: Defect in skull EVEN AFTER RECONSTRUCTION with fragments from Dallas. Only possible conclusion from Humes’s overall testimony regarding photographs, size and location of the large skull defect (before reconstruction): the defect remaining after reconstruction was in the back of the head.

        4) No doubt based on Ebersole and Humes (Boswell too) that prior to reconstruction there was no back to JFK’s head.

        • Photon says:

          Funny how you avoid mentioning that Ebersole also thought that JFK had been shot with buckshot.
          Or that at the time he was practicing therapeutic, not diagnostic radiology.
          Nor do you mention that nobody else saw a sutured neck wound, nor an occipital fragment.
          It is obvious during the interview that Dr. Ebersole’s credentials were an issue with the interviewing pathologists. He was not board certified at the time.

          • Jonathan says:

            Not a surprising reply, Photon.

            But you confuse cause with effect. Ebersole observed there was no back to the head. Doesn’t matter what his opinion might have been on what caused it.

            Who cares what his practice was? Who cares that he wasn’t board certified? He saw no back to the head. That doesn’t take any special expertise. You make things up, Photon. Ebersole saw no back to the head.

          • Photon says:

            who cares that he thought that JFK had been shot with buckshot? Who cares that he saw a sutured neck wound when nobody else did? Who cares that the HSCA panal questioned his qualifications?
            Perhaps because they demonstrate that he was WRONG.

      • KenS says:

        Photon, let’s try that again without the argumentum ad hominen; forget for a moment the rear defect issue, it may not be necessary to justify a frontal shot. I would be interested in your opinion of Fiester’s blood spatter analysis from the Z film, or if you have already given it, where it might be found.

        • Photon says:

          It is incorrect.And I do not recognize her as an expert in the matter-at least not until we see evidence that she is.

          • KenS says:

            Photon,

            So the following are your credentials as you have previously posted:

            “I am an Officer in a professional corporation in Northern Virginia that contracts for services with the Federal government. By law the nature of those services must remain confidential.
            Due to the nature of prior Federal service I have professional contacts with members of several Federal agencies and give expert consultation in several fields , including national security.
            As you are aware I was an Officer in the Armed Forces; I come from a long line of Officers who have served this country.”

            Am I to assume that you are as qualified to say Fiester’s analysis is incorrect, as she is to make an analysis, based on your credentials? Honestly, I’m not looking for a fight, I thought you might have something interesting to contribute. Isn’t that why we’re here?

          • Photon says:

            I am not making a comment based on my credentials. It is a comment based on her credentials-as posted on her website and other places.
            She stated that she was a “Certified Senior Crime Scene Investigator”. But nowhere does it mention what entity certified her. The IAI does certify a “Senior Crime Scene Analyst” but her name is not listed on the roster of individuals with that certification.
            I don’y claim to be an expert on blood spatter patterns-frankly after the PBS program on “The Real CSI” I have my doubts about the validity of the concept.
            But Ms. Fiester does claim to be an expert and is repeatedly referred to as one on this site. Where is the proof that she is?

      • Jonathan says:

        you’re wrong about the word “deficit.” Mantik uses it in describing JFK’s skull in “Murder in Dealey Plaza”.

        I suspect the reason you’re touchy about the word “deficit” is that is connotes an “absence” or “something missing.” As in part of the skull.

        • Photon says:

          That reveals more about Dr. Mantik’s grasp of forensic pathology than it does about me.

        • Ronnie Wayne says:

          As in a fist, grapefruit or soft ball sized “deficit”, hole, or missing portion of the skull/brain described that way by by people who saw it?

          • Dr TCH says:

            This very large (exit) wound was in the right-rear part of the President’s skull. One could call it a defect (not deficit), but a wound of this magnitude is rarely referred to as a defect. There was a fair degree of uniformity in the description by the Parkland medical personnel. The official narrative is a fairy-tale. And, as far as the silly SBT is concerned, even Cmdr. Humes, when asked, admitted that it was “extremely unlikely.”

  15. Paul Turner says:

    Photon asked me for proof of only two shells being found from the 6th floor of the TSBD after the shooting. That proof comes from WC testimony of Lt. Day(Dallas Police). Various WC report exhibits show the story.

    • Dr TCH says:

      Paul, you are correct about the two shells. More exactly, there were two photos (and two corresponding police reports), one showing two shells and one with three shells. What is most interesting is that the two could morph into three when someone apparently decided that the assassin most have made three shots. These are displayed in either “Six Seconds in Dallas” or “Bloody Treason.” Can’t get to my copies right now…very late at night and have to hit the sack.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

In seeking to expand the range of informed debate about the events of 1963 and its aftermath, JFKFacts.org welcomes comments that are factual, engaging, and civil. more